On Tue Apr 30 2002 at 17:33, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > > let's take the last buggy (7.0) IMHO > > and the 7.2 has a lot of updates, not necesarly > > remote root bugs > 7.0 was rather horrifying. Having to patch glibc soon > after release was not very convincing, IMHO. I could > not really recall 7.1 - nothing exceptional - but 7.2 > is rather solid, everything considered. 7.3 promises > to be a repeat of 4.2/5.2 :)
I totally agree about 7.0 (ouch!), 7.1 was ok (it included the 2.4.x kernel), 7.2 so far has been great. But lots of updates. And updates to updates. It is a real management problem (and I'm sure a headache for redhat). I guess its the nature of the beast, I'd much rather have bugfixes available asap, especially for security problems. But my real reason for joining into this conversation is to give some recognition to redhat 6.2 -- arguably their best release so far, especially as a reliable server platform. Once it is patched with all its (essential!) updates (under 300Mb for all the binary rpms), it has proven to be a very solid and stable platform. I know of many rh6.2 (server) boxes that just won't fall down (unless deliberately/accidently shut down), and I can't see any point in upgrading a box when it is doing its job so well. I recently rebooted one busy 6.2 box that had an uptime of 473 days (taken down only for more disk/ram and a timely kernel upgrade). I hope bugfix/security support for rh6.2 doesn't fall off the end of the list as new releases appear. 6.2 is still out there and doing a very fine job. It deserves ongoing support (although I recognise that eventually all good things come to an end :) As for the next release, it will happen when it happens. If it builds and improves on 7.2, then I'm looking forward to it. Meanwhile I can wait, 7.2 is currently doing a very fine job as my workstation :) Cheers Tony _______________________________________________ Redhat-devel-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
